Gold Action #1: Instream and Floodplain Habitat Restoration

Transcription

1 Gold Action #1: Instream and Floodplain Habitat Restoration Action Type: Recovery Threat addressed: Severity: Significant Spawning/egg incubation, Pre/post spawning migrations, Juvenile rearing Action Description Work with public and private landowners in lower Gold Creek to develop and implement restoration projects that improve instream, riparian and floodplain habitat conditions. Proposed work includes extensive LWD placement, development of flood channels, floodplain revegetation and more. Justification/Background The assessment identified past wood removal and ongoing channel widening and simplification as major contributors to poor habitat conditions and dewatering in lower Gold Creek. Key Partners: USFS; USFWS; USBR; YBFWRB; KCT Time to Implement: 1-3 years Time to Benefit: 5+ years Cost Estimate: Cost Derivation Life stage(s) affected: Link to Threats Table: $3 million per BOR- summarize from steps Status Notes Currently proposed in USBR Bull Trout Enhancement package. Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# 2 Step# 3 Step# 4 Step# UPDATE NOTES: Title update: Instream and Floodplain Habitat Restoration Status: In Progress Improve access and timing of use of spawning areas that are naturally dewatered Maintain, restore, and protect riparian zones and stream channels associated with bull trout habitat Implement stream restoration in degraded stream reaches Reduce cumulative impacts in FMO to populations that are impacted during natural dewatering of spawning and rearing areas Reduce cumulative impacts to populations with limited habitat Conduct a hydrogeomorphic study BTWG Priority: 9 Complete design and permitting of Gold Creek instream habitat project development Fund and implement instream work in Gold Creek Monitor project outcomes Monitor bank protection activities BTWG Priority: 2 Page 1

2 Gold Action #1: Instream and Floodplain Habitat Restoration Next Step # 1 Conduct a hydrogeomorphic study Conduct an assessment of the hydrologic, hydraulic, habitat, and geomorphic conditions within the lower three miles of Gold Creek to better understand the causal mechanisms contributing to habitat degradation and seasonal dewatering, and the associated impacts to Gold Creek bull trout. Additional 2-D Flood modeling being completed as part of Next Step # Status: Complete Lead: KCT Point Person: Mitch Long Timeline: Completed in 2015 by KCT. Budget Estimate: BTWG Priority: 9 Hydrologic monitoring and habitat surveys were conducted during the summer of 2013 and 2014 to evaluate the spatial and temporal character of dewatering in Gold Creek, and to determine the mechanisms contributing to seasonal dewatering in the creek. Next Step # 2 Complete design and permitting of Gold Creek instream habitat project development Design work for instream habitat restoration is being completed by KCT. Additional funding is needed to complete permitting and conduct outreach to stakeholders Status: In Progress Lead: KCT Point Person: Mitch Long Timeline: 18 months? Budget Estimate: $240,000 Need to secure ~$100,000 to complete work Preliminary designs completed spring Project implementation may involve multiple phases; focus on getting landowner and other key stakeholder support. Page 2

3 Gold Action #1: Instream and Floodplain Habitat Restoration Next Step # 3 Fund and implement instream work in Gold Creek Secure funding and begin implementation of instream habitat restoration designs (see next step #2) Status: Proposed Lead: KCT Point Person: Mitch Long Timeline: Construction of one or more phases in 2017 Budget Estimate: Intial estimate of $3,000,000 total cost for all phases Project implementation may involve multiple phases; need to assure balancing of project benefits with any short term impacts. NSD developed conceptual designs to meet the restoration objectives to restore perennial flow and improve instream habitat in Gold Creek. KCT is working with landowners to ensure support of final designs. Next Step # 4 Monitor project outcomes Develop monitoring protocols for pre- and post-project implementation to determine if the project is meeting objectives for improving instream, riparian and floodplain habitat conditions. Lead: KCT Point Person: Mitch Long Timeline: Budget Estimate: TBD Discuss with Mitch Long Page 3

4 Gold Action #1: Instream and Floodplain Habitat Restoration Next Step # 5 Monitor bank protection activities Evaluate landowner-implemented projects directly impacting the stream, including residential bank stabilization. Provide technical assistance and ensure all actions are properly permitted and legally conducted. Monitor instream actions on the creek via permit applications and annual photo documentation. Lead: Kittitas County; WDFW Point Person: Timeline: Ongoing Budget Estimate: Included in BTTF scope of work. For land use see Gold Action #4, next step #2. BTWG Priority: 2 Page 4

5 Gold Action #2: Restore Groundwater Hydrology Action Type: Recovery Threat addressed: Dewatering Severity: Significant Spawning/egg incubation, Pre/post spawning migrations, Juvenile rearing Action Description The hydrologic monitoring identified several mechanisms contributing to seasonal dewatering in Gold Creek, the largest being the capture of groundwater by the Gold Creek Pond. This action focuses on restoring groundwater hydrology and perennial flow in Gold Creek. Justification/Background Dewatering occurs annually in the late summer and early fall in a one-to-two mile reach. Primary spawning habitat is above the dry reach and can be inaccessible for weeks or more at a time. Dewatering also strands and causes mortality of adult and juvenile fish, reduces invertebrate biomass, and decreases habitat complexity (the loss of pool holding habitat is of particular concern). Key Partners: USFS; USFWS; USBR; KCT Time to Implement: 3-5 years Time to Benefit: 5+ years Cost Estimate: Cost Derivation TBD Life stage(s) affected: Link to Threats Table: Status Notes Currently proposed in USBR Bull Trout Enhancement package. Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout & LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# 2 Step# 3 Reduce cumulative impacts in FMO to populations that are impacted during natural dewatering of spawning and rearing areas Improve access and timing of use of spawning areas that are naturally dewatered 2016 UPDATE NOTES: Title update: Restore Groundwater Hydrology Status: Proposed Develop specific proposals for filling or modifying Gold Creek Pond Implement Gold Creek Watershed Actions in USFS Upper Yakima EA BTWG Priority: 2 Access and implement changes to the drainage system Page 5

6 Gold Action #2: Restore Groundwater Hydrology Next Step # 1 Develop specific proposals for filling or modifying Gold Creek Pond The Gold Creek Assessment identified Gold Creek Pond as the major contributor to seasonal dewatering in Gold Creek. Key partners need to work together to identify possible solutions that reduce groundwater capture by the pond, build support for preferred alternatives, and enter into design phase Status: Proposed Lead: KCT; USFS Point Person: Mitch Long Timeline: Budget Estimate: TBD; USFWS funding already committed to support. KCT planning a landscape charette for fall 2016 Initial assessment of Gold Creek Pond is complete. KCT has committed to convene a meeting of key partners focused specifically on pond next steps and who takes the lead. Need to work with both Mt. Baker Snoqualmie and Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest. Potential to use fill from USFS bridge (Gold Action 5) should be considered as alternatives are developed. Next Step # 2 Implement Gold Creek Watershed Actions in USFS Upper Yakima EA USFS identified specific actions to improve hydrology and fish habitat in the Upper Yakima Restoration Environmental Assessment. Once NEPA is complete, USFS should work with partners to fund and implement these actions in Gold Creek. Restoration actions may include the removal of legacy dikes and road fill from the gravel pit operation, relocation of ADA accessible trail away from Gold Creek, relocation of the footbridge out of floodplain, and restoration of hydraulic connectivity through the parking area. Lead: USFS Point Person: Patty Garvey-Darda; Bill Ehinger Timeline: Budget Estimate: TBD Talk to Patty and Bill regarding status and details BTWG Priority: 2 Page 6

7 Gold Action #2: Restore Groundwater Hydrology Next Step # 3 Access and implement changes to the drainage system The Gold Creek Assessment found a buried drain pipe network that intercepts groundwater and delivers it to the pond, and may be contributing to dewatering of Gold Creek. The next step focuses on first, identifying if it is a problem and how to fix it in a way that landowners support, and then, implementing proposed solutions. 3.1 Lead: KCT Point Person: Mitch Long Timeline: 1-5 years Budget Estimate: TBD; 25k of USFWS funding secured. Page 7

8 Gold Action #3: Long Term Habitat Protection in the Gold Creek Valley Action Type: Recovery Threat addressed: Development (residential and urbanization) Severity: Unknown significant Spawning/egg incubation, Pre/post spawning migrations, Juvenile Rearing Action Description Development of recreational residences in the Gold Creek floodplain can negatively affect restoration and protection opportunities. Floodplain acquisitions and/or easements and effective application of development requirements can play an important role in protecting habitat in the lower Gold Creek valley. Justification/Background Adverse impacts on bull trout habitat are possible as a result of residential/recreational development on private land holdings. Key Partners: WSDOT; USFS; USFWS; Kittitas County; KCT; Forterra Time to Implement: 5-10 years Time to Benefit: 5+ years Cost Estimate: $1-3 million Life stage(s) affected: Link to Threats Table: Cost Derivation Cost estimate is based on initial discussions with land owners in the lower creek corridor and associated appraisal values. Status Notes Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# UPDATE NOTES: Title update: Long term habitat protection in the Gold Creek valley Status: Proposed Protect land within the Gold Creek watershed Ensure appropriate regulatory framework is used to guide development BTWG Priority: 2 Page 8

9 Gold Action #3: Long Term Habitat Protection in the Gold Creek Valley Next Step # 1 Protect land within the Gold Creek watershed Support ongoing efforts to purchase and protect land adjacent to Gold Creek through acquisitions and easements as opportunities arise. Status: In Progress Lead: Forterra; KCT; USFWS Section 6 staff; WDFW; Kittitas County FCZD Point Person: Charlie Raiens, Forterra; Mitch Long, KCT Timeline: Ongoing Budget Estimate: TBD Next Step # 2 Ensure appropriate regulatory framework is used to guide development Ensure new development within the Gold Creek Valley is properly permitted and regulatory requirements are being followed. Promote land use policies and regulations (SMA, Critical Areas, zoning, etc) that protect aquatic habitat. Provide technical input and assistance in permitting process. Lead: WDFW; Kittitas County Point Person: Timeline: Ongoing Budget Estimate: Discuss with appropriate WDFW Region 3 Habitat Program staff and County staff. BTWG Priority: 2 Page 9

10 Gold Action #4: Monitor and Improve Passage Conditions in Gold Creek Action Type: Monitoring/Recovery Life stage(s) affected: Pre/post spawning migrations Threat addressed: Passage Barriers, Dewatering Severity: Unknown significant Action Description Low flow conditions and recreational dams can limit upstream passage of bull trout to spawning areas in Gold Creek. Use the Bull Trout Task Force to monitor for developing passage problems and to address the occasional problems associated with recreational dams (e.g. educating the public about, monitoring for presence, and dismantling when found). There is strong evidence that there are passage problems across the reservoir bed in many years. Work with USBR to ensure passage conditions on the reservoir bed are monitored and addressed when needed and address impacts of unmanaged recreation on migration bull trout. Justification/Background Field observations indicate that there are potential passage problems into the creek from the lake. Recreational dams have also occasionally been observed in the lower reaches of Gold Creek. Key Partners: USFS; USFWS; WDFW; USBR; BTTF Time to Implement: 1-5 years Time to Benefit: Immediate Cost Estimate: Link to Threats Table: Changes annually; $ ,000 Cost Derivation Monitoring of passage conditions and for recreation dams is included in the cost estimate for the Bull Trout Task Force (Multiple Pop #1). Status Notes Currently proposed in USBR Bull Trout Enhancement package. Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout 3.1, Mitigation Measure 8.1 LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# 2 Step# 3 Reduce cumulative impacts in FMO to populations that are impacted during natural dewatering of spawning and rearing areas Improve access and timing of use of spawning areas that are naturally dewatered 2016 UPDATE NOTES: Status: Proposed Use Bull Trout Task Force to remove recreational dams in Gold Creek Monitor and address reservoir bed passage isssues in Gold Creek Reduce Keechelus Reservoir Bed Access BTWG Priority: 2 Page 10

11 Gold Action #4: Monitor and Improve Passage Conditions in Gold Creek Next Step # 1 Use Bull Trout Task Force to remove recreational dams in Gold Creek The Bull Trout Task Force has found recreational rock dams early in summer before the stream dewaters. The BTTF will periodically visit and remove any rock dams and educate recreationists about the impacts of recreational dams. Removing any potential barriers is key to allowing fish to migrate upstream before instream flow issues limit movement. 3.4 Status: In Progress Lead: MCFEG Point Person: Cassandra Weekes Timeline: Ongoing Budget Estimate: Included in BTTF scope of work. BTTF is currently funded through YBIP. There is potential for BTTF to expand to two crews, Upper Yakima and Naches. Two crews would require additional funding. Next Step # 2 Monitor and address reservoir bed passage isssues in Gold Creek Passage problems which preclude or hinder passage across the exposed reservoir bed into Gold Creek are the responsibility of the USBR. Work with the USBR to monitor passage conditions across the reservoir bed and provide passage. Build an official and solidly funded program (possibly an expanded contract with WDFW and a role for the Bull Trout Task Force). 8.1 Mitigation Measures Status: In Progress Lead: USBR; WDFW; USFWS; BTTF Point Person: Timeline: Budget Estimate: TBD Need to develop options and a plan. Page 11

12 Gold Action #4: Monitor and Improve Passage Conditions in Gold Creek Next Step # 3 Reduce Keechelus Reservoir Bed Access When Keechelus is low, vehicles access and drive on the reservoir bed and along the Gold Creek channel. This may lead to habitat impacts and harassment and/or poaching of fish that are highly exposed in the shallow and unvegetated channel. USBR and USFS are looking at options to restrict access to this area, including installing a guardrail and gate to block access to reservoir bed. Changing relevant policies if needed (e.g. adjusting designated recreation area boundaries), and signing areas to indicate access restrictions, and associated enforcement. BTTF and others to educate users about possible impacts of their activities. Lead: USFS; USBR Point Person: Patty Garvey-Darda Timeline: 1-2 years Budget Estimate: TBD; add cost estimates from USFS and BTTF BTWG Priority: 2 Review rules and regulations for vehicle access to reservoirs. Discuss with USFS and USBR on who enforces access and whether policy changes or improved enforcement are needed. Follow up with USFS regarding the proposal to relocate the boat ramp. Page 12

13 Gold Action #5: Replace USFS Road 4832 Bridge Over Gold Creek Action Type: Recovery Threat addressed: Passage Barriers Severity: Significant Spawning/egg incubation, Pre/post spawning migrations, Juvenile rearing Action Description Construction of I-90 and Forest Service Road 4832 altered the hydrology and floodplain function of Gold Creek. The original roads were constructed on fill across most of the historical floodplain, and bridges confined Gold Creek to a single active channel. Expanding the remaining Gold Creek USFS Road 4832 bridge would restore the Gold Creek floodplain and enhance connectivity of bull trout habitat within Gold Creek and between Gold Creek and Keechelus Reservoir. Justification/Background The bridge artificially constrains the floodplain and creek channel, resulting in scouring and sediment deposition patterns that prevent natural habitat processes from occurring (USDA, 2011). I-90 has a new long-span bridge over Gold Creek that allows full floodplain function and wildlife migration; the primary remaining constriction is the USFS bridge immediately upstream of the I-90 bridge. Key Partners: USFS Time to Implement: 1-5 years Time to Benefit: >10 years Cost Estimate: Cost Derivation Life stage(s) affected: Link to Threats Table: $7,000,000 for construction and implementation Status Notes Currently proposed in USBR Bull Trout Enhancement package. Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout 3.2 LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# 2 Reduce habitat and floodplain impacts Reduce impacts to adjacent instream habitat, and remove passage barriers Reduce impacts from transportation networks. Improve management practices for maintenance and construction of roads 2016 UPDATE NOTES: New action developed in Status: Proposed Finish FS Road 4832 Gold Creek bridge design Fund and implement USFS Gold Creek bridge replacement Page 13

14 Gold Action #5: Replace USFS Road 4832 Bridge Over Gold Creek Next Step # 1 Finish FS Road 4832 Gold Creek bridge design The Forest Service has completed 90% designs and NEPA for a new 800 foot bridge over the Gold Creek floodplain. The USFS is currently looking for $30,000 to complete 100% designs. 3.2 Status: In Progress Lead: USFS Point Person: Patty Garvey-Darda Timeline: Budget Estimate: Construction costs are estimated at between $6 and 10 million. At the February 2016 Yakima Bull Trout Working Group meeting Patty Garvey-Darda agreed to coordinate a meeting with a broad group of stakeholders. To review funding options. Fill could be used as part of the Gold Creek Pond Project (see Action #2); summary of spreadsheet results. Additional monitoring will be needed on sediment transport and movement. Next Step # 2 Fund and implement USFS Gold Creek bridge replacement Work with USFS to fund and implement the Gold Creek bridge replacement and include habitat restoration in the floodplain. 3.2 Status: Proposed Lead: USFS Point Person: Patty Garvey-Darda Timeline: TBD Budget Estimate: $7,000,000 for construction and implementation Page 14

15 Gold Action #6: Passage at Keechelus Dam Action Type: Recovery Life stage(s) affected: Spawning/egg incubation Threat addressed: Passage Barriers Severity: Significant Link to Threats Table: G6 Action Description Construct permanent upstream and downstream fish passage facilities at Keechelus Dam. Justification/Background An entrainment study was conducted at Keechelus Dam in Although no bull trout were captured, bull trout have been found during spawning and snorkel surveys downstream of the dam and it is believed these fish originated from Keechelus Lake. They cannot return since upstream passage is not available at the dam. The Gold Creek population is small and cannot afford to lose potential spawners. Key Partners: USBR; DOE; Yakama Nation Time to Implement: 9-12 years Time to Benefit: >10 years Cost Estimate: $ million Cost Derivation Approximate estimate included in YRBWEP budget. Status Notes See Broad Scale Action #3: Passage at Keechelus Dam. Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# 2 Improve fish passage at at all BOR dams, smaller diversions, and at road crossings Improve migratory life history connectivity Design and permitting of Keechelus Dam passage facilities Develop interim trap and haul proposal 2016 UPDATE NOTES: New action developed in Page 15

16 Gold Action #6: Passage at Keechelus Dam Next Step # 1 Design and permitting of Keechelus Dam passage facilities Assessment being conducted, proposed for implementation in future YBIP phases. Lead: USBR; USFWS; WDFW; YN Point Person: Joel Hubble; Richard Visser Timeline: Budget Estimate: From appraisal Next Step # 2 Develop interim trap and haul proposal Develop short term options including trap and haul and/or capturing fish isolated below the dam for propagation. Lead: USBR; USFWS Point Person: Timeline: TBD Budget Estimate: TBD Funding in 2017 USBR ESA budget Page 16

17 Gold Action #7: Supplementation, Fish Salvage and/or Translocation Action Type: Research/Recovery Life stage(s) affected: Adult Threat addressed: Low Abundance (increased risk of extirpation) Severity: Varied Action Description A supplementation, fish salvage/reconditioning, or translocation project may be required to enhance the Gold Creek bull trout population. Conduct a feasibility study to determine if supplementation is a viable course of action. Justification/Background The effective population size of the Gold Creek bull trout population is chronically low based on annual redd counts. Key Partners: WDFW; USFWS; Yakama Nation Time to Implement: 1-5 years Time to Benefit: >10 years Cost Estimate: Cost Derivation $100,000 per year for 20 years Link to Threats Table: Status Notes See Multiple Pops Action #4: Evaluate Supplementation. Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout 3.8 LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# 2 Develop habitat baseline information for feasibility assessments for reintroduction/translocation and development of priority habitat projects Develop feasibility assessment for introduction/translocation of bull trout 2016 UPDATE NOTES: New action developed in Fish salvage and rearing USGS Modeling of Gold Creek Page 17

18 Gold Action #7: Supplementation, Fish Salvage and/or Translocation Next Step # 1 Fish salvage and rearing Develop a salvage plan to explore the potential of rearing or transporting salvaged bull trout from Gold Creek in order to increase survival and productivity. Lead: WDFW; USFWS Point Person: Eric Anderson Timeline: TBD Budget Estimate: TBD On option is salvaging bull trout parr in Gold Creek as pools go dry and raise them to 10+ before releasing them back into Gold Creek. Discuss specific next steps with the Bull Trout Working Group; a small group will meet to brainstorm salvage options for Gold Creek and other populations. Next Step # 2 USGS Modeling of Gold Creek USGS is building a Decision Support Model of the Upper Yakima. The model will serve as a tool to make the best use of resources for recovery actions, including salvage. The model will outline fundamental objectives for persistence of bull trout, help to identify alternatives with regard to recovery tasks, including salvage, and assist to facilitate management decisions. Status: In Progress Lead: USGS; USFWS Point Person: Judy Neibauer Timeline: Fall 2016 Budget Estimate: USFWS funding Page 18

19 Gold Action #8: Identify and Implement Passage and Habitat Projects in Keechelus Action Type: Monitoring/Recovery Life stage(s) affected: Juvenile, subadult Threat addressed: Limited extent of habitat, passage barriers Severity: Unknown Action Description Recent data shows that juvenile and subadult bull trout are rearing in numerous tributaries to Keechelus Lake. Cold, Coal, Resort, Rocky Run and other Keechelus tributaries may provide significant rearing and subadult habitat for bull trout. Identify and implement projects that provide passage and improve habitat in these tributaries. Justification/Background Central Washington University monitored several Keechelus tributaries as part of the WSDOT I-90 project. From Paul James, CWU Biology Professor, found two juvenile bull trout in Coal Creek, one juvenile bull trout in Cold Creek, one juvenile bull trout in Resort Creek, and one juvenile in Rocky Run Creek. The WSDOT I-90 project will provide funding to correct passage barriers in several tributaries. Key Partners: KCT; MCFEG; CWU; USFS Time to Implement: 1-5 years Time to Benefit: >10 years Cost Estimate: Cost Derivation Status Notes Link to Threats Table: TBD, cost estimate will be specific to individual tributaries. Associated USFWS RUIP Actions: Links to Other Plans: Associated BOR Bull Trout 3.3 LIST OF NEXT STEPS: Step# 1 Step# 2 Step# 3 Connect FMO and spawning and rearing habitat 2016 UPDATE NOTES: New action developed in Assess and design passage project at Cold Creek John Wayne Trail crossing BTWG Priority: 2 Fix passage barriers in Rocky Run Creek BTWG Priority: 3 Assessment of Meadow, Coal, Cold and Resort Creeks BTWG Priority: 2 Page 19

20 Gold Action #8: Identify and Implement Passage and Habitat Projects in Keechelus Next Step # 1 Assess and design passage project at Cold Creek John Wayne Trail crossing The culvert was built and washed out in Rebuilding a structure has been proposed, but there is some concern that habitat is insufficient to support significant bull trout use. There's a need to reassess habitat values before implementing. Incorporate monitoring of subsequent fish use to document benefit and evaluate if passage is a priority. 3.3 Lead: USFS; USBR Point Person: Patty Garvey-Darda Timeline: Budget Estimate: $1,850,000 Conceptual design completed by Paul Tappel and commissioned by KCT. BTWG Priority: 2 Need to review, identify lead and pursue development of final design. Brown trout established in Upper Twin Lake in Cold Creek headwaters. Previous monitoring found <.5 cfs in flow in summer; ¾ mile up a natural barrier. Next Step # 2 Fix passage barriers in Rocky Run Creek The Forest Service Road 4832 crossing over Rocky Run Creek was impacted after a post-storm flood event in November The result of this post-storm event provides evidence that the structure is most likely a velocity barrier to juvenile and subadult bull trout at higher flows. Lead: USFS Point Person: Patty Garvey-Darda Timeline: Implementation in Budget Estimate: $260,000 Work with USFS to determine how much available habitat opended up. Project is listed in Oka-Wen NF Fish Habitat Projects biennium funding proposal. BTWG Priority: 3 Page 20

21 Gold Action #8: Identify and Implement Passage and Habitat Projects in Keechelus Next Step # 3 Assessment of Meadow, Coal, Cold and Resort Creeks Determine bull trout habitat suitability and potential restoration opportunities in Meadow, Coal, Cold and Resort Creeks. Lead: KCT, MCFEG, USFS Point Person: Timeline: Budget Estimate: BTWG Priority: 2 Meadow Creek evaluation conducted in 2000 found warm temperatures after recent clear cutting; conditions may have improved; more flow and habitat than Cold Creek. May need to reevaluate temperatures. Reference: Hydrologic and water temperature investigation of tributaries to Keechelus Reservoir by Jeff Thomas, USFWS, March Page 21